you realize arero, that whether or not an indictment occurs depends on the preponderance of evidence and how much is actually available. meaning, if there is not enough evidence to convict somebody in a trial, then there's no indictment handed down. what would you prefer to have happen? Do you want them to indict someone without proper evidence just because people who are ignorant to that evidence are calling for it?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver
Sorry for your lost
|
philosophy.
Last edited by Destroyer; 11-25-2014 at 10:13 AM.
|